Two questions

No, even though I desire to be better I don't feel like I deserve to be taken care of, least of all by myself.

Attached: weak person.jpg (500x372, 45.79K)

That's fair. I was of the credence that you shouldn't help others if you cannot first help yourself.

You make a fair point, but what if one who is evil mistreats others? Does the perpetrator deserve to be treated as well as one who has done good for others?

But how will you ever get better if you do not care for yourself? And why don't you feel you deserve to be taken care of?

>But how will you ever get better if you do not care for yourself?
Don't we all desire the impossible in some form or other?
>And why don't you feel you deserve to be taken care of?
I have nothing to offer.

>Don't we all desire the impossible in some form or other?
If it is attainable, it was never impossible to begin with.
>I have nothing to offer.
Why do you say that?

>Do you deserve your best / Do you consider yourself worthy of your best effort in life? If so why, If not, why not?
I working towards being the best possible version of myself. why? because what else is the point of life?
>Do you care about yourself and should others care about you? If so why, if not, why not?
I care about myself because ultimately I want to care and heal other people.

Respectable. How would you say the journey towards being your best possible version of yourself is going?

>How would you say the journey towards being your best possible version of yourself is going?
lonely and very depressive at times lol

>Do you consider yourself worthy of your best effort in life?
This is a good question. I wonder what my best effort is though. I mean, I have a job, I have my own place, I'm self sufficient, moving up in my career. I've made it by normie standards. Quite frankly I'm bored though. If this is the best effort, then I'm absolutely worthy.
But this is boring and unfulfilling. I have dreams man, I want to do other stuff too. I think I'm worthy of pursuing that too, but as long as I'm not actively making it happen, I'm definitely not worthy.

>Do you care about yourself and should others care about you?
I'm pretty impartial about caring about myself. I stay healthy and that's good so I guess I care about myself on a physical level. And I don't really care if others care for me or not. If they do then that's great, but they're entitled to their own opinions.
Honestly I care very little for people, even my friends and family. I feel like if I were standing at their wake, I'd just be like "welp, time to move on." that's what I did when I dumped my ex. Didn't feel much remorse.

Would you say the entirety of the journey so far has been more positive or negative?

>This is a good question. I wonder what my best effort is though. I mean, I have a job, I have my own place, I'm self sufficient, moving up in my career. I've made it by normie standards. Quite frankly I'm bored though. If this is the best effort, then I'm absolutely worthy.
But this is boring and unfulfilling. I have dreams man, I want to do other stuff too. I think I'm worthy of pursuing that too, but as long as I'm not actively making it happen, I'm definitely not worthy.
By your best effort, I mean do you do everything in your power to attain the best possible option with the tools at your disposal for yourself?

>I'm pretty impartial about caring about myself. I stay healthy and that's good so I guess I care about myself on a physical level. And I don't really care if others care for me or not. If they do then that's great, but they're entitled to their own opinions.
Honestly I care very little for people, even my friends and family. I feel like if I were standing at their wake, I'd just be like "welp, time to move on." that's what I did when I dumped my ex. Didn't feel much remorse.
To each his own. Though do you feel people in general need people who care about them in life?

>Does the perpetrator deserve to be treated as well as one who has done good for others?
The perpetrator most likely has some mental defect or associated trauma that caused their actions. At the very least there is a causal chain that led to their actions. They should be prevented from doing any more evil and rehabilitated. This rehabilitation should be accomplished without sacrificing the will of the person involved. I say this because a corrupt system's rehabilitation is a corruption of the individual who is falsely convicted. A system that preserves the will of the person involved while genuinely helping them, and not for example torturing them into submission, should prevent against this corruption.

Our current system of justice is impure and contains traces of evil. We're very far off from such a justice system existing, but we should do everything we can so that we are able to provide this kind of treatment. It's gains for humanity will be unprecedented. In general the strong and wise should help train and assist the weak and confused. In the end society should no longer require the fear of extreme consequences. Our enforcement of justice should be capable of detaining and rehabilitating in such a way that we guarantee less evil while also preserving the will of the individual. It is absolutely possible, albeit extremely difficult, especially with the number of people involved, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't strive for it.

I have an inferiority complex that words cannot do justice. It's not deep-seated, it's in the marrow of my fucking bones. I never felt like I deserved anything good. I've always hated gifts, compliments, and praise. Having nice things instinctually feels wrong to me. I managed to have sex and I couldn't even enjoy it I can't cum in front of a girl. because I knew she would have rather had it with someone else. She wouldn't even make eye contact with me. My life is a stupid fucking joke and a bullet to the head would be the punchline if I weren't such a coward.

Attached: 1513349003039.jpg (540x602, 35.07K)

>The perpetrator most likely has some mental defect or associated trauma that caused their actions. At the very least there is a causal chain that led to their actions. They should be prevented from doing any more evil and rehabilitated. This rehabilitation should be accomplished without sacrificing the will of the person involved. I say this because a corrupt system's rehabilitation is a corruption of the individual who is falsely convicted. A system that preserves the will of the person involved while genuinely helping them, and not for example torturing them into submission, should prevent against this corruption.
Would you say that no one is born/chooses evil, but becomes evil as a result of environment or circumstance? Also, what if the person involved is obstinate against the system and does not want to cooperate?

>Our current system of justice is impure and contains traces of evil. We're very far off from such a justice system existing, but we should do everything we can so that we are able to provide this kind of treatment. It's gains for humanity will be unprecedented. In general the strong and wise should help train and assist the weak and confused. In the end society should no longer require the fear of extreme consequences. Our enforcement of justice should be capable of detaining and rehabilitating in such a way that we guarantee less evil while also preserving the will of the individual. It is absolutely possible, albeit extremely difficult, especially with the number of people involved, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't strive for it.
How do you guarantee less evil while preserving the will of the individual, if the individual's will is to do a great evil?

Where would you say the inferiority complex originated, and why do you not feel worthy of the care and kindness that has been given to you? And why do you consider a bullet to the head a solution?

>By your best effort, I mean do you do everything in your power to attain the best possible option with the tools at your disposal for yourself?
Oh, yes. If I want something I'll autisticly pursue it. Idk if you're into MBTI stuff but I fall squarely into ISTP.

>do you feel people in general need people who care about them in life?
Not really. But I can only speak for myself. I am very, very bad with emotions because they either don't exist or don't profit me. I'm not sure, I'm not that introspective.
Ofc, I'm a self sufficient 20-something year old. I can say that but I can't deny how interpersonal relationships have been useful. Parents need to care for their children, romance is the gateway to reproduction, I need to make sure my coworkers are thinking about me so I can stay in their good graces. But again, I'm bad with emotions - I understand the product but I don't really understand them for what they are. Every romantic partner I've had said I seem like a robot, just doing the things that I do with little regard for the feelings of others. So, I guess the answer is yes.

My 2 cents

>Oh, yes. If I want something I'll autisticly pursue it. Idk if you're into MBTI stuff but I fall squarely into ISTP.
Based on the description of the Virtuoso(ISTP), would you say you possess something of a "universal" sense of fairness, and prefer to keep things fresh in life?

>Not really. But I can only speak for myself. I am very, very bad with emotions because they either don't exist or don't profit me. I'm not sure, I'm not that introspective.
Ofc, I'm a self sufficient 20-something year old. I can say that but I can't deny how interpersonal relationships have been useful. Parents need to care for their children, romance is the gateway to reproduction, I need to make sure my coworkers are thinking about me so I can stay in their good graces. But again, I'm bad with emotions - I understand the product but I don't really understand them for what they are. Every romantic partner I've had said I seem like a robot, just doing the things that I do with little regard for the feelings of others. So, I guess the answer is yes.
When you say emotions don't exist or don't profit you, would you say your emotions are generally calm and don't typically rise to a noticeable level? Also, would you say live and let live describes your credence in daily dealings?

>Would you say that no one is born/chooses evil, but becomes evil as a result of environment or circumstance? Also, what if the person involved is obstinate against the system and does not want to cooperate?
Not necessarily. I think a person can in theory be essentially guaranteed to be evil no matter the initial circumstances of life. I however believe this is extremely unlikely. To completely explain this I will have to briefly explain my assumptions about determinism. I think a person can make a genuine choice. In that they are capable, given a set of options, of choosing one of the choices at complete random. Our universe enables this possibility, therefore I'm going to assume the brain can exploit it. However I also believe that we are incapable of creating these choices. They are presented to us as information through our sensory system and mutated in our minds with a degree of randomness. Once again our universe permits for this to work so I don't see why our brains couldn't exploit it. I don't believe we have any control of the choices that exist in our minds, only which ones we choose. A person is more likely to be evil if the pathways of choice that lead to evil outnumber the paths toward good. I also believe that good people can cure evil people. I think we can give them the pathways toward making good choices. In doing so we increase the likelihood of them genuinely becoming good.

>How do you guarantee less evil while preserving the will of the individual, if the individual's will is to do a great evil?
Through an extremely thorough understanding of the human mind such that we can diagnose psychological issues with pinpoint accuracy. We are so blind in our understanding of consciousness at the moment that of course these moral dilemmas seem impossible to resolve. We have no system to even understand them in the first place. Hypothesis like mine above need to be explored, corrected/rejected, and understood.

>Not necessarily. I think a person can in theory be essentially guaranteed to be evil no matter the initial circumstances of life. I however believe this is extremely unlikely. To completely explain this I will have to briefly explain my assumptions about determinism. I think a person can make a genuine choice. In that they are capable, given a set of options, of choosing one of the choices at complete random. Our universe enables this possibility, therefore I'm going to assume the brain can exploit it. However I also believe that we are incapable of creating these choices. They are presented to us as information through our sensory system and mutated in our minds with a degree of randomness. Once again our universe permits for this to work so I don't see why our brains couldn't exploit it. I don't believe we have any control of the choices that exist in our minds, only which ones we choose. A person is more likely to be evil if the pathways of choice that lead to evil outnumber the paths toward good. I also believe that good people can cure evil people. I think we can give them the pathways toward making good choices. In doing so we increase the likelihood of them genuinely becoming good.
By a person being guaranteed to be evil, do you mean it to be theoretically possible that one can never experience good in their life, or that they can simply only be presented with evil thoughts that make up their choices? If a person has no control over the choices that exist in one's mind, how could one dismiss options presented or contemplate to generate new choices? If our leaning towards good or evil is based on the number of pathways to each, does that mean that one could theoretically be a perfect good or a perfect evil in wiring?

>Through an extremely thorough understanding of the human mind such that we can diagnose psychological issues with pinpoint accuracy. We are so blind in our understanding of consciousness at the moment that of course these moral dilemmas seem impossible to resolve. We have no system to even understand them in the first place. Hypothesis like mine above need to be explored, corrected/rejected, and understood.
Very well. But if such a system existed, would that mean that even if an individual was obstinate, that you could still assist them under a different moral system? And if so, what would be some qualities of such a system?

>would you say you possess something of a "universal" sense of fairness, and prefer to keep things fresh in life?
Absolutely. Fair is fair and you decide what to do with the hand you're dealt. It's your job to make the best of it and nobody has better control over that than you. You are put into the world and given circumstances. You are the only one who can make the best of them.
And I do like to keep things fresh. I get bored super easily so I need to constantly pursue different things to keep stimulated. Usually hobbies of sorts

>When you say emotions don't exist or don't profit you, would you say your emotions are generally calm and don't typically rise to a noticeable level?
Yes, the not existing part was semi-sarcastic. I'm just very grounded and rational. Emotions can be irrational, and that doesn't make sense to me.
>Also, would you say live and let live describes your credence in daily dealings?
Another tough one. Other people living and interacting with us is part of the hand we're dealt, so it's again our job to decide what to do.
I'll live and let live if I see the outcome as positive. If it's not, then I won't. Other times I'll just separate myself from the situation entirely and move on to the next on. Sometimes that's the easier solution

This has been fun but I gotta hit the sack. Damn I love talking about myself.
Have a good night user

It was interesting to hear your perspective on life, have a good night as well user.

This is going to sound cliche but I believe it started with my (single) mother. She wanted to be a good mom, but she was just a miserable, angry, always stressed, bitter woman who'd been fucked over by life and further fucked by her own shitty choices. My dad cheated on her and she took it out on me, physically and mentally, for looking like him. She'd frequently scream in my face, hit me without warning, and mock me. I seldom satisfied her ruthless perfectionism and was often insulted and made fun of for not getting tasks right the first time, which made me stop wanting to do them at all. My mother made me feel like a blithering dumbass incapable of accomplishing anything to a satisfactory degree. She was, unsurprisingly then, the catalyst of my hatred and disgust for women. Other women did the rest. My confidence has been shattered by the endless romantic rejection that marked my adolescence. I went after everything in a skirt and ended up with my dick in my hand every time. Somewhere along the way it became part of my identity. I learned it was a mistake to express interest and even affection towards women, because it always ended in pain. I honestly can't imagine a girl being genuinely attracted to me, that's something that happens for other people. A bullet is the solution because I refuse to live the rest of my life this way. Why should I continue to live? So I can continue to be the butt of jokes? So I can see others live in happiness, taking for granted things I could never dream of having?

>By a person being guaranteed to be evil, do you mean it to be theoretically possible that one can never experience good in their life, or that they can simply only be presented with evil thoughts that make up their choices?
I think both of these things are possible, but inexplicably unlikely. For the purposes of practical discussion, you could call them impossible in the same way that you call yourself spontaneously decomposing at the atomic level impossible. In constructing a system of morals it's important to note the possibility though. It changes how you view the world around you.

Even if they only experienced evil thoughts, they could still experience good by chance. It's less likely, but still possible. Thoughts lead to imprecise actions. Imprecise actions lead to unexpected results. Unexpected results differ from intentions.

>If a person has no control over the choices that exist in one's mind, how could one dismiss options presented or contemplate to generate new choices?
New choices come about as time progresses through some unknown mechanism in the brain. That amount of vagueness I can state with good confidence. Thinking takes time. It's an obvious fact but we're working with very limited material here. Choosing to act or not to act is in and of itself a choice. The mechanism I originally described could postpone action and wait for more choices to be made available. When I'm thinking I feel as though I'm just waiting for my mind to come upon something useful that I can then validate quickly through my current understanding and beliefs. I believe there is a describable phenomena happening here and it can be understood.

>If our leaning towards good or evil is based on the number of pathways to each, does that mean that one could theoretically be a perfect good or a perfect evil in wiring
Yes, but once again, given the sheer amount of possible choices that then lead to other choices, I find that extremely unlikely.

>Very well. But if such a system existed, would that mean that even if an individual was obstinate, that you could still assist them under a different moral system?
The goal is to prove that through some set of moral actions you can increase the likelihood of someone else acting in the same moral manner. If you can prove that, you have a mechanism you can use to cure evil.

>And if so, what would be some qualities of such a system?
I wish I could tell you with confidence. I'm firing in the dark here with as much information as I can confidently work with. We're too early to really discuss this. My naive emotional response is that treating people well makes it more likely for them to treat others well. It's vague, but maybe one day we'll expand upon this and really understand how to use it as a force of guaranteed good.

If you understand where this all began, and where it has brought you, why can't you simply change the way you live as opposed to using the bullet? You know that your mother's bitterness towards your father disheartened you and your efforts for validation from women in adolescence with no avail left you cold and alone. But you can choose not to act as the identity you crafted for yourself. It was chasing everything in a skirt that got you where you were, so why not stop chasing anything in a skirt? If your relationship always ends in pain, wouldn't that make you more resilient to the pain? And why can't you imagine a girl being genuinely attracted to you? If your the but of jokes, why does it bother you and why can't you just change the inspiration? If you see others with happiness, why not feel happy for them? And what makes you think you're dreams are out of your reach? You said it was your mother who made you feel like that, and you know why your mother was the way she was, so why would you trust the way she made you feel as your guide in life?